Sunday Poll: Will NLEC’s Closing Be Positive Or Negative In The Long-Term?

Late last week Larry Rice said his downtown emergency emergency shelter, the New Life Evangelistic Center will close today:

Rev. Larry Rice said he will comply with a judge’s order and close his downtown shelter.

The New Life Evangelistic Center (NLEC) will be ceasing operations on 5:00 p.m. Sunday. A judge refused Rice’s request to keep the shelter on open Thursday. (Post-Dispatch)

Rice said he hopes the closure is temporary.  Today’s poll assumes the closure is permanent:

NLEC will close at 5pm, this poll closes at 8pm.

— Steve Patterson

Trump Tweets Gateway Arch Should Be Changed To Gold Color

Om March 21st @USPS Stamps introduced a new Gateway Arch priority mail stamp, retweeting a @KMOV tweet:

In the early hours this morning President Trump tweeted that our iconic Gateway Arch would look better if gold in color.

This wouldn’t be the way to make St, Louis great again.

— Steve Patterson

Fire Destroyed Lindell Hotel 150 Years Ago Today

A huge fire destroyed St. Louis’ premier hotel on this date a century snd a half ago:

On March 30, 1867, the Lindell Hotel caught fire for reasons unknown. The ornate six-story building was a marvel of architectural design carefully crafted from brick, iron, and stone. As word of the fire began to spread, many of the nearly 400 guests ignored the warnings. Much like some passengers of the Titanic believed the ship unsinkable, these hotel residents thought themselves safe within the strong, solid confines surrounding them. They continued relaxing, eating, and drinking, but the fire wasn’t about to be ignored. (Missouri History Museum blog– recomended)

The Lindell Hotel was rebuilt on the same site, opening in 1874. It experienced a fire in 1885. It was razed in 1906 to build the Stix, Baer & Fuller department store.  It became a Dillard’s in 1984, and connected to St. Louis Centre (opened 1985) via a 4-story walkway over Washington Ave.

Today the building on the site contains:

• The Laurel Apartments
• Embassy Suites Hotel
• Robust Wine Bar
• National Blues Museum
• Sugarfire Smokehouse

A lot of history at this site.

— Steve Patterson

Readers Divided On Breed-Specific Municipal Bans

The results of the most recent non-scientific Sunday Poll were nearly tied:

Q: Agree or disagree: Municipal bans on ‘pit bull’ dog breeds should remain in force.

• Strongly agree 19 [36.54%]
• Agree 1 [1.92%]
• Somewhat agree 5 [9.62%]
• Neither agree or disagree 1 [1.92%]
• Somewhat disagree 4 [7.69%]
• Disagree 6 [11.54%]
• Strongly disagree 16 [30.77%]
• Unsure/No Answer 0 [0%]

The North County suburb of Florissant repealed it’s pit bull ban earlier this month, but requires owners to spay or neuter. From December:

Florissant’s ordinance has been in effect since 2010. It formally applies to three breeds of dogs generally considered “pit bulls” — the American Staffordshire terrier, the Staffordshire bull terrier or the American pit bull terrier — as well as any mixed breed dog with any of the three as “an element of its breeding.” It also applies to any dog with “the appearance and characteristics” of a pit bull — and unless the owner pays for a DNA test, Florissant Animal Control generally relies on the opinion of whoever reports a dog as problematic.

Not all of those owners who’ve found themselves on the city’s radar can find a new home for their dogs in a week. While Florissant recently started allowing shelters to pick up the dogs they confiscate, the city has euthanized 201 dogs since its ban went into law. (Riverfront Times)

Part of my motivation for dong this poll is to force myself to look at the issue and those on each side. You might assume the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is opposed to such bans, but they’re pro-ban. See What’s the Kindest Thing We Can Do for Pit Bulls?  Like any controversial topic, there are plenty of opposing views. See Dear PETA: Dogs Respond To PETA Joining Terrible Anti-Pit Bull Coalition.

A 2014 national poll reflects the divided views. I’m not a huge dog person, we have a cat. Still, in my experience visiting my brother-in-law’s house his two pit bulls are very sweet — my only fear is they may knock me down trying to get hugs and kisses.

— Steve Patterson

Charter Amendments On General Election Ballot

A week from tomorrow is the general election in St. Louis.  I already posted about the School Board & Junior College Board races. We all know about the mayor’s race, and some of us live in a ward electing an alderman to a 4-year term. All of us have the following six items on our ballot:

PROPOSITION A AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CHARTER (Proposed by Initiative Petition)

A proposed ordinance submitting to the registered voters of the City of St. Louis an amendment to Article XV of the City Charter repealing Sections 4 and 5 and enacting in lieu thereof four new sections, Sections 4, 4a, 4b and 5, the purpose of which is to abolish the Office of Recorder of Deeds and consolidate the functions of that office with that of the Assessor, and place any realized cost savings in a special fund known as “the police body-worn camera fund” dedicated to the purchase and use of police body-worn cameras by the city Metropolitan Police Department subject to appropriation from the fund by the Board of Aldermen for the express purpose of the fund (the full text of which is available at all polling places).

PROPOSITION B AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CHARTER (Proposed by Initiative Petition)

A proposed ordinance submitting to the registered voters of the City of St. Louis an amendment to Article II of the City Charter repealing Sections 1, 2 and 3 and enacting in lieu thereof four new Sections 1, 1(a), 2 and 3, the purpose of which is to move the Primary Municipal Election date from March to August and the General Municipal Election date from April to November in even-numbered years, commencing in 2020 and continuing every two years thereafter, and providing for a transition to accomplish those changes (the full text of which is available at all polling places).

PROPOSITION C AMENDMENT TO THE CITY CHARTER (Proposed by Ordinance)

Shall Section 4 of Article XVIII of the Charter of the City of St. Louis be amended to add paragraph (f), which provides for the enactment of an ordinance establishing a residents’ preference to residents of the City of St. Louis upon successfully passing a civil service examination for civil service positions with the City?

Section 4. Ordinances to be enacted – The mayor and aldermen shall provide, by ordinance: (f) City Residents’ Preference. For a preference to be granted to residents of the City of St. Louis who successfully pass an examination for a civil service position.

PROPOSITION 1 (Proposed by Ordinance)

Shall the City of St. Louis impose a sales tax at a rate of one half of one percent for economic development purposes including (1) North/South Metrolink, (2) neighborhood revitalization, (3) workforce development; (4) public safety, and (5) to upgrade the city’s infrastructure, with annual public audits?

PROPOSITION 2 (Proposed by Ordinance)

Shall the use tax paid by businesses on out-of-state purchases and derived from the one half of one percent increased use tax, which corresponds to approval and levy of an Economic Development Sales Tax in the City of St. Louis, be used for the purposes of minority job training and business development programs, and a portion of construction costs, but not construction cost overruns, of a multipurpose stadium for soccer, local amateur sports, concerts and community events? A use tax is the equivalent of a sales tax on purchases from out-of-state sellers by in-state buyers and on certain taxable business transactions for which a sales tax is not levied. No taxpayer is subject to a sales tax and a use tax on the same transaction. The City shall be required to make available to the public an audited comprehensive financial report detailing the management and use of the portion of the funds each year.

PROPOSITION NS BOND ISSUE ORDINANCE (Proposed by Initiative Petition)

A proposition submitting to the registered voters of the City of St. Louis a proposed Ordinance authorizing and directing the issuance of general obligation bonds of The City of St. Louis, Missouri, not to exceed $40,000,000 principal amount in aggregate (of which no more than $6,000,000 in principal amount shall be issued annually) for the purpose of stabilizing, as limited by the Ordinance, residential properties owned by public entities, as described in the Ordinance, and authorizing the execution of an agreement relating to the expenditure of the sale proceeds of such bonds (the full text of which is available at all polling places).

I agree with the St. Louis American — no on A & B, yes on C.  Still reading pros & cons on the last three.

— Steve Patterson